Six Ypsilanti Township firefighters opt for early retirement
Ypsilanti Township Fire Department Lt. Larry Gakle is one of six firefighters to take an early out offer.
Tom Perkins | For AnnArbor.com
Within weeks of the Ypsilanti Township Fire Department offering early retirement to its staff, six firefighters have opted to depart. The township’s goal is to see eight staff members take the offer, which Fire Chief Eric Copeland said is likely to happen by July 1.
The Board of Trustees approved the cost-saving measure at its May 5 meeting. The township appropriated $800,000 from its fire fund balance to cover operating costs in fiscal year 2010, and Copeland projected the fire fund will be depleted by 2012 at current spending levels.
He said he is pleased several firefighters took the opportunity, which will save the department $576,000 in salaries alone in the next fiscal year. Long term, Copeland expects savings of roughly $8 million over the next 15 years.
“It puts me in a better managerial position in terms of how to float the wages and benefits packages of my remaining staff and make sure all my vehicles and resources are up to par,” he said.
One staff member has already left the department, while several more departures are scheduled in the coming weeks. Several of the department's higher-ranking officers have announced they will retire so far, including the fire marshal, a senior captain and two lieutenants. Copeland said the number of veterans retiring is not cause for concern because the department has younger staff who are ready for promotion. Other experienced firefighters will also remain aboard.
“We have some people with tremendous potential, and this is a great opportunity for some of the older guys to retire - they’ve served the township well,” Copeland said. “We have staff that aspire to leadership roles and it’s my aim to create the stage for that to happen. They bring some fresh new ideas and some innovative ways to continue to deliver the service.”
The new arrangement will leave the department staffed with 27 firefighters - down from 33 - at three stations. The minimum number of firefighters on one shift is six, though Copeland said there will usually be more. The central station has two engines and a rescue vehicle, while each satellite station houses two engines. The department requires two firefighters per truck.
Addressing concerns over safety, Copeland said the development and implementation of the new arrangement is a collaborative effort between management, union leadership and staff. He said while the department is operating with less staff, he believes his firefighters are still safe.
“It’s a win-win situation in how we are still able to be a functional fire department with a reduced staff,” he said.
Lieutenant Larry Gakle is one of the firefighters taking the early retirement offer. He said he doesn’t want to leave, but the unpredictable financial situation, restructuring and the fact that it came down to younger guys being laid off or the older guys taking the early retirement influenced his decision.
“I’ll probably regret leaving and I’ll probably regret staying - that’s my feeling,” he said.
Copeland said the situation is tough for all involved, but he sees it as a positive step to help the department remain solvent and achieve a targeted $1 million in savings over the next two years.
“I think we’re on our way to getting to our goal of $1 million in savings,” he said. “And in a substantive way - it’s not just a shell game.”
Comments
Tom Perkins
Tue, May 25, 2010 : 12:26 p.m.
ronaldduck, Ultimately that number will drop to 25. There are six firefighters who Copeland says have committed so far, which is what I was referring to. Copeland says it is likely eight firefighters will have opted for the early out by July 1, but he is not 100-percent sure.
Larry G
Mon, May 24, 2010 : 9:47 p.m.
@ snapshot. First of all, our union wouldn't "decry" public safety concerns as the meaning of "decry" implies open condemnation with intent to discredit. As for "gone like the wind" we don't possess that so it obviously couldn't be "theirs". As for the public safety concerns of the firefighters, you couldn't be more incorrect. The firefighters have been trying to address the understaffing concerns for years, actually decades. The political entity is the sole decision maker as it pertains to staffing levels. The union has no power except to do the best we can with what personnel is afforded us. To say that we cut and run is an insult and and shows your ignorance of the situation. I fully support using taxpayer dollars for worthy causes such as public safety or adult education for those of you striving for your G E D.
ronaldduck
Mon, May 24, 2010 : 9:09 p.m.
I'm no mathmagician so will somebody please explain this to me. The townships goal is to see eight staff members take the offer, which Fire Chief Eric Copeland said is likely to happen by July 1. The new arrangement will leave the department staffed with 27 firefighters - down from 33.
ronaldduck
Mon, May 24, 2010 : 8:54 p.m.
First of all the early buyout was nothing more than buying years into the retirement system at about $12,000 total per firefighter. That will save $576,00 next year. How is spending $72,000 to save $576,00 in next year alone an abuse of taxpayer money. Perhaps you would feel better reading about layoffs. I took the buyout with 22 1/2 years on the department. I had planned on working 30 years. I did not want to leave but we were told by the township that if we did not accept the offer that the 6 lowest seniority firefighters would be layed off. My partner was one of them. He has 9 years on the job. Like so many others his wife has already taken a pay cut, and he has 5 children. So forgive me if I am gone like the wind. I care what happens to the other employees. Walk a mile in my shoes before you judge me. I am very concerned about public safety and the saftey of the firefighters that are left at the department but budget cuts are happening everywhere. We as a union felt we had no choice.
snapshot
Mon, May 24, 2010 : 6:19 p.m.
I am so against early buyouts for public employees. It is an abuse of taxpayer money and a crime as far as I'm concerned. These unions decry public safety concerns to prevent a layoff but when they get a buyout, their gone like the wind. So much for public safety concerns.